Structured feedback and operative video debriefing with critical view of safety annotation in training of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The learning curve in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is lengthened compared to open surgery. It has been reported that structured feedback and training in teams of two trainees improves MIS training and MIS performance. Annotation of surgical images and videos may prove beneficial for surgical training. This study investigated whether structured feedback and video debriefing, including annotation of critical view of safety (CVS), have beneficial learning effects in a predefined, multi-modal MIS training curriculum in teams of two trainees. METHODS: This randomized-controlled single-center study included medical students without MIS experience (n = 80). The participants first completed a standardized and structured multi-modal MIS training curriculum. They were then randomly divided into two groups (n = 40 each), and four laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LCs) were performed on ex-vivo porcine livers each. Students in the intervention group received structured feedback after each LC, consisting of LC performance evaluations through tutor-trainee joint video debriefing and CVS video annotation. Performance was evaluated using global and LC-specific Objective Structured Assessments of Technical Skills (OSATS) and Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) scores. RESULTS: The participants in the intervention group had higher global and LC-specific OSATS as well as global and LC-specific GOALS scores than the participants in the control group (25.5 ± 7.3 vs. 23.4 ± 5.1, p = 0.003; 47.6 ± 12.9 vs. 36 ± 12.8, p < 0.001; 17.5 ± 4.4 vs. 16 ± 3.8, p < 0.001; 6.6 ± 2.3 vs. 5.9 ± 2.1, p = 0.005). The intervention group achieved CVS more often than the control group (1. LC: 20 vs. 10 participants, p = 0.037, 2. LC: 24 vs. 8, p = 0.001, 3. LC: 31 vs. 8, p < 0.001, 4. LC: 31 vs. 10, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Structured feedback and video debriefing with CVS annotation improves CVS achievement and ex-vivo porcine LC training performance based on OSATS and GOALS scores.

Short-term Outcomes of Robotic Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy: Propensity Score-matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of the current study was to investigate the perioperative outcomes of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) in a high-volume center. BACKGROUND: Despite RPDs prospective advantages over OPD, current evidence comparing the 2 has been limited and has prompted further investigation. The aim of this study was to compare both approaches while including the learning curve phase for RPD. METHODS: A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis of a prospective database of RPD with OPD (2017-2022) at a high-volume center was performed. The main outcomes were overall- and pancreas-specific complications. RESULTS: Of 375 patients who underwent PD (OPD n=276; RPD n=99), 180 were included in propensity score-matched analysis (90 per group). RPD was associated with less blood loss [500 (300-800) vs 750 (400-1000) mL; P =0.006] and more patients without a complication (50% vs 19%; P <0.001). Operative time was longer [453 (408-529) vs 306 (247-362) min; P <0.001]; in patients with ductal adenocarcinoma, fewer lymph nodes were harvested [24 (18-27) vs 33 (27-39); P <0.001] with RPD versus OPD. There were no significant differences for major complications (38% vs 47%; P =0.291), reoperation rate (14% vs 10%; P =0.495), postoperative pancreatic fistula (21% vs 23%; P =0.858), and patients with the textbook outcome (62% vs 55%; P =0.452). CONCLUSIONS: Including the learning phase, RPD can be safely implemented in high-volume settings and shows potential for improved perioperative outcomes versus OPD. Pancreas-specific morbidity was unaffected by the robotic approach. Randomized trials with specifically trained pancreatic surgeons and expanded indications for the robotic approach are needed.

An international Delphi consensus for surgical quality assessment of lymphadenectomy and anastomosis in minimally invasive total gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive total gastrectomy (MITG) is a mainstay for curative treatment of patients with gastric cancer. To define and standardize optimal surgical techniques and further improve clinical outcomes through the enhanced MITG surgical quality, there must be consensus on the key technical steps of lymphadenectomy and anastomosis creation, which is currently lacking. This study aimed to determine an expert consensus from an international panel regarding the technical aspects of the performance of MITG for oncological indications using the Delphi method. METHODS: A 100-point scoping survey was created based on the deconstruction of MITG into its key technical steps through local and international expert opinion and literature evidence. An international expert panel comprising upper gastrointestinal and general surgeons participated in multiple rounds of a Delphi consensus. The panelists voted on the issues concerning importance, difficulty, or agreement using an online questionnaire. A priori consensus standard was set at > 80% for agreement to a statement. Internal consistency and reliability were evaluated using Cronbach's α. RESULTS: Thirty expert upper gastrointestinal and general surgeons participated in three online Delphi rounds, generating a final consensus of 41 statements regarding MITG for gastric cancer. The consensus was gained from 22, 12, and 7 questions from Delphi rounds 1, 2, and 3, which were rephrased into the 41 statetments respectively. For lymphadenectomy and aspects of anastomosis creation, Cronbach's α for round 1 was 0.896 and 0.886, and for round 2 was 0.848 and 0.779, regarding difficulty or importance. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi consensus defined 41 steps as crucial for performing a high-quality MITG for oncological indications based on the standards of an international panel. The results of this consensus provide a platform for creating and validating surgical quality assessment tools designed to improve clinical outcomes and standardize surgical quality in MITG.

Evidence mapping on how to perform an optimal surgical repair of large hiatal hernias.

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic and large hiatal hernia (HH) is a common disorder requiring surgical management. However, there is a lack of systematic, evidence-based recommendations summarizing recent reviews on surgical treatment of symptomatic HH. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to create evidence mapping on the key technical issues of HH repair based on the highest available evidence. METHODS: A systematic review identified studies on eight key issues of large symptomatic HH repair. The literature was screened for the highest level of evidence (LE from level 1 to 5) according to the Oxford Center for evidence-based medicine's scale. For each topic, only studies of the highest available level of evidence were considered. RESULTS: Out of the 28.783 studies matching the keyword algorithm, 47 were considered. The following recommendations could be deduced: minimally invasive surgery is the recommended approach (LE 1a); a complete hernia sac dissection should be considered (LE 3b); extensive division of short gastric vessels cannot be recommended; however, limited dissection of the most upper vessels may be helpful for a floppy fundoplication (LE 1a); vagus nerve should be preserved (LE 3b); a dorso-ventral cruroplasty is recommended (LE 1b); routine fundoplication should be considered to prevent postoperative gastroesophageal reflux (LE 2b); posterior partial fundoplication should be favored over other forms of fundoplication (LE 1a); mesh augmentation is indicated in large HH with paraesophageal involvement (LE 1a). CONCLUSION: The current evidence mapping is a reasonable instrument based on the best evidence available to guide surgeons in determining optimal symptomatic and large HH repair.

Impact of circumferential resection margin on survival in ampullary cancer: retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ampullary carcinoma is a clinically variable entity. This study aimed to evaluate prognostic factors for the outcome of resected ampullary carcinoma patients with particular intent to analyse the influence of surgical radicality. METHODS: Patients undergoing resection between 2002 and 2017 were analysed. Clinicopathological parameters, perioperative outcome and survival were examined. Risk factor analysis for postresection survival was performed. Resection margin status was evaluated according to the revised classification for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. RESULTS: A total of 234 patients were identified, 97.9 per cent (n = 229) underwent formal resection, while 2.1 per cent (n = 5) underwent ampullary resection. Histological subtypes were 46.6 per cent (n = 109) pancreatobiliary, 34.2 per cent (n = 80) intestinal, 11.5 per cent (n = 27) mixed, and 7.7 per cent (n = 18) undetermined. In the pancreatobiliary group, tumours were more advanced with more vascular resections, pT4 stage, G3 differentiation and pN+ status. Five-year overall survival was significantly different for pancreatobiliary compared to intestinal (51.7 per cent versus 72.8 per cent, P = 0.0087). In univariable analysis, age, pT4 stage, pN+, pancreatobiliary subtype and positive resection margin were significantly associated with worse overall survival. Long-term outcome was significantly better after true R0 resection (circumferential resection margin-, tumour clearance >1 mm) compared with circumferential resection margin+ (<1 mm) and R1 resections (5-year overall survival: 69.6 per cent, median overall survival 191 months versus 42.4 per cent and 53 months; P = 0.0017). CONCLUSION: Postresection survival of ampullary carcinoma patients is determined by histological subtype and surgical radicality. Intestinal differentiation is associated with less advanced tumour stages and better differentiation, which is reflected in a significantly better overall survival compared to pancreatobiliary differentiation. Despite this, true R0-resection is a prognostic key determinant in both entities, achieving 5-year survival in two-thirds of patients.

Viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in surgical smoke in minimally invasive and open surgery: a single-center prospective clinical trial.

At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was assumed that SARS-CoV-2 could be transmitted through surgical smoke generated by electrocauterization. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) was targeted due to potentially higher concentrations of the SARS-CoV-2 particles in the pneumoperitoneum. Some surgical societies even recommended open surgery instead of MIS to prevent the potential spread of SARS-CoV-2 from the pneumoperitoneum. This study aimed to detect SARS-CoV-2 in surgical smoke during open and MIS. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection who underwent open surgery or MIS at Heidelberg University Hospital were included in the study. A control group of patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection undergoing MIS or open surgery was included for comparison. The trial was approved by the Ethics Committee of Heidelberg University Medical School (S-098/2021). The following samples were collected: nasopharyngeal and intraabdominal swabs, blood, urine, surgical smoke, and air samples from the operating room. An SKC BioSampler was used to sample the surgical smoke from the pneumoperitoneum during MIS and the approximate surgical field during open surgery in 15 ml of sterilized phosphate-buffered saline. An RT-PCR test was performed on all collected samples to detect SARS-CoV-2 viral particles. Twelve patients with proven SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent open abdominal surgery. Two SARS-CoV-2-positive patients underwent an MIS procedure. The control group included 24 patients: 12 underwent open surgery and 12 MIS. One intraabdominal swab in a patient with SARS-CoV-2 infection was positive for SARS-CoV-2. However, during both open surgery and MIS, none of the surgical smoke samples showed any detectable viral particles of SARS-CoV-2. The air samples collected at the end of the surgical procedure showed no viral particles of SARS-CoV-2. Major complications (CD ≥ IIIa) were more often observed in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients (10 vs. 4, p = 0.001). This study showed no detectable viral particles of SARS-CoV-2 in surgical smoke sampled during MIS and open surgery. Thus, the discussed risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 via surgical smoke could not be confirmed in the present study.

Prognostic value of ascites in patients with liver cirrhosis undergoing cardiac surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Mild or moderate liver cirrhosis increases the risk of complications after cardiac surgery. Ascites is the most common complication associated with liver cirrhosis. However, the prognostic value of ascites on postoperative morbidity and mortality after cardiac surgery remains uninvestigated. METHODS: A retrospective study included 69 patients with preoperatively diagnosed liver cirrhosis who underwent cardiac surgery between January 2009 and January 2018 at the Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Germany. The patients were divided into ascites and non-ascites groups based on preoperatively diagnosed ascites. Thirty-day mortality, postoperative complications, length of stay, and blood transfusions were analyzed postoperatively. RESULTS: Out of the total of 69 patients, 14 (21%) had preoperatively diagnosed ascites. Ascites group had more postoperative complications such as blood transfusions (packed red blood cells: 78.6% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.010; fresh frozen plasma: 57.1% vs. 29.1%, p = 0.049), acute kidney injury (78.6% vs. 45.5%, p = 0.027), longer ICU stay (8 vs. 3 days, p = 0.044) with prolonged mechanical ventilation (57.1% vs. 23.6%, p = 0.015) and tracheotomy (28.6% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.003). The 30-day mortality rate was significantly higher in the ascites group than in the non-ascites group (35.7% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Ascites should be implemented in preoperative risk score assessments in cirrhotic patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Preoperative treatment of ascites could reduce the negative impact of ascites on postoperative complications after cardiac surgery. However, this needs to be thoroughly investigated in prospective randomized clinical trials.

Telestration with augmented reality improves the performance of the first ten ex vivo porcine laparoscopic cholecystectomies: a randomized controlled study.

INTRODUCTION: The learning curve in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is steep compared to open surgery. One of the reasons is that training in the operating room in MIS is mainly limited to verbal instructions. The iSurgeon telestration device with augmented reality (AR) enables visual instructions, guidance, and feedback during MIS. This study aims to compare the effects of the iSurgeon on the training of novices performing repeated laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) on a porcine liver compared to traditional verbal instruction methods. METHODS: Forty medical students were randomized into the iSurgeon and the control group. The iSurgeon group performed 10 LCs receiving interactive visual guidance. The control group performed 10 LCs receiving conventional verbal guidance. The performance assessment using Objective Structured Assessments of Technical Skills (OSATS) and Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) scores, the total operating time, and complications were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The iSurgeon group performed LCs significantly better (global GOALS 17.3 ± 2.6 vs. 16 ± 2.6, p ≤ 0.001, LC specific GOALS 7 ± 2 vs. 5.9 ± 2.1, p ≤ 0.001, global OSATS 25.3 ± 4.3 vs. 23.5 ± 3.9, p ≤ 0.001, LC specific OSATS scores 50.8 ± 11.1 vs. 41.2 ± 9.4, p ≤ 0.001) compared to the control group. The iSurgeon group had significantly fewer intraoperative complications in total (2.7 ± 2.0 vs. 3.6 ± 2.0, p ≤ 0.001) than the control group. There was no difference in operating time (79.6 ± 25.7 vs. 84.5 ± 33.2 min, p = 0.087). CONCLUSION: Visual guidance using the telestration device with AR, iSurgeon, improves performance and lowers the complication rates in LCs in novices compared to conventional verbal expert guidance.

Valve-in-Valve TAVR versus Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: Early Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess short-term outcomes of patients with failed aortic valve bioprosthesis undergoing valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) or redo surgical aortic valve replacement (rSAVR). METHODS: Between 2009 and 2019, 90 patients who underwent ViV-TAVR (n = 73) or rSAVR (n = 17) due to failed aortic valve bioprosthesis fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Groups were compared regarding clinical end points, including in-hospital all-cause mortality. Patients with endocarditis and in a need of combined cardiac surgery were excluded from the study. RESULTS: ViV-TAVR patients were older (78.0 ± 7.4 vs. 62.1 ± 16.2 years, p = 0.012) and showed a higher prevalence of baseline comorbidities such as atrial fibrillation, diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, and arterial hypertension. In-hospital all-cause mortality was higher for rSAVR than in the ViV-TAVR group (17.6 vs. 0%, p < 0.001), whereas intensive care unit stay was more often complicated by blood transfusions for rSAVR patients without differences in cerebrovascular events. The paravalvular leak was detected in 52.1% ViV-TAVR patients compared with 0% among rSAVR patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: ViV-TAVR can be a safe and feasible alternative treatment option in patients with degenerated aortic valve bioprosthesis. The choice of treatment should include the patient's individual characteristics considering ViV-TAVR as a standard of care.

[Use of Mesh in Hiatal Hernia Repair and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease - Pro]. / Netzimplantation bei der Chirurgie der Hiatushernie und beim Reflux ­ Pro.

Net augmentation in surgical care of hiatus hernias has many advantages, but is still controversial. Optimal surgical treatment of symptomatic hiatus hernia is to provide long-term correction of the malposition of the stomach and other organs that have been displaced in the thorax, as well as reducing the necessity of risky reoperations. In order to assess the role of net augmentation in repair of the hiatus here, the benefit in the form of the avoidance of symptomatic recurrence and reoperations must be balanced against the risk of net-associated complications. In the present review article, we present a detailed evaluation of current evidence on net augmentation. We conclude that net augmentation in large hernias (> 5 cm), with or without paraesophageal involvement, should be routinely employed, as this reduces the risk of recurrence and the need for complex reoperations with a high risk of complications. Net-associated complications are rare and can largely be avoided with the correct implantation technique and proper net materials. The level of evidence could be improved if more validated register and randomised controlled studies were performed.